Impact of feeding modified soy protein concentrate in the starter phase on growth performance and gastrointestinal responses in broiler chickens through to day 42 of age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth performance and physiological responses of feeding modified soy protein concentrate (MSPC, 72% CP) in the starter phase were investigated. A total of 1,216 d old male Ross x Ross 708 broiler chicks were placed in 32 floor pens based on BW, fed one of 4 (n = 8) corn-soybean meal-based diets formulated with 0, 7.7, 10.0 or 12.5% MSPC for 10 d and transitioned to common diets to d 42. Feed intake, BW, and mortality were measured. Samples of birds were bled on d 10 for plasma uric acid (PUA) and subsequently necropsied for organs weight and samples of pancreatic tissues for enzyme activity, jejunal tissues for enzyme activity and histomorphology and ceca digesta for microbial activity. Litter moisture was determined on d 36 and 42 and sample of birds were necropsied on d 42 for breast yield and ceca digesta sample for microbial activity. Feeding MSPC linearly (P < 0.001) increased starter growth performance. Overall (d 0-42), MSPC linearly (P = 0.05)improved FCR; The FCR was 1.566, 1.535, 1.488 and 1.527 for 0.0, 7.7, 10.0, and 12.5% MSPC, respectively. Feeding MSPC linearly (P ≤ 0.04) increased breast yield and decreased small intestine length, gizzard digesta pH, and PUA. Breast yield was 230, 238, 246, and 252 g/kg BW for 0.0, 7.7, 10.0, and 12.5% MSPC, respectively. Pancreatic and jejunal chymotrypsin and trypsin activities and histomorphology were not (P > 0.10) influenced by the diets. On d 10, MSPC linearly (P < 0.05) reduced ceca digesta abundance of Ruminococcaceae, E. Coli, and Clostridium but increased abundance of Bifidobacterium and the ratio of Lactobacilli and E. Coli. Birds fed MSPC showed linear (P = 0.01) increase in abundance of Bifidobacterium on d 42. Feeding MSPC linearly increased ceca digesta acetic (P = 0.01) and reduced propionic (P = 0.048), and iso butyric (P = 0.003) in 10 d old broiler chicken. In conclusion, up to 12.5% MSPC inclusion in the starter phase increased growth performance through to d 42 linked to enhanced gut health through reduction of enteric pathogens.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".